WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lake Country WAC Kohn
2023 WI Adult 40 & Over · WI Adult 40 & Over 3.5 (Eve) Women
13 players · average NTRP 3.31 / WISCONSIN
Schedule8 played
i
Flight standings18 teams · WI Adult 40 & Over 3.5 (Eve) Women
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lake Country WAC Rozman | 7 | 1 | 20 | 225 |
| 2WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML PVCT Seidl | 7 | 1 | 23 | 281 |
| 3WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Mequon Elite Melberg | 7 | 1 | 33 | 305 |
| 4WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lake Geneva Barkdoll | 7 | 1 | 33 | 300 |
| 5WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Brookfield Elite Kalbach | 6 | 2 | 26 | 276 |
| 6WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Brookfield Elite Reigle | 6 | 2 | 35 | 337 |
| 7WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML River Glen Olson | 5 | 3 | 40 | 361 |
| 8WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lake Country WAC Berg | 4 | 4 | 46 | 398 |
| 9WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lake Country WAC Deppisch | 4 | 4 | 56 | 391 |
| 10WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Princeton Coury | 3 | 5 | 42 | 355 |
| 11WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lifesport Racine Leopold | 3 | 5 | 50 | 379 |
| 12WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Oconomowoc Lake Club Kass | 3 | 5 | 54 | 386 |
| 13WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Western Russell | 3 | 5 | 59 | 410 |
| 14WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Princeton Eichten | 2 | 6 | 52 | 397 |
| 15WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Lake Country WAC Kohn | 2 | 6 | 52 | 362 |
| 16WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Waterford Union HS Webb | 1 | 7 | 65 | 427 |
| 17WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML Mequon Elite Buell | 1 | 7 | 66 | 430 |
| 18WI Adult 40&O 3.5 W GML PVTC Lambo | 1 | 7 | 66 | 440 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays
Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.
Roster averages 3.04 estimated across 7 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Dawn Weimar + Aimee Kohn | 11–9 | 55% games | +5.5% vs expected |
| Kathryn Tweet + Beth Blanck | 5–6 | 50% games | +2.8% vs expected |
| Pamela Casey + Nancy Buss | 2–3 | 50% games | +1.6% vs expected |
| Pamela Casey + Aimee Kohn | 6–4 | 55% games | −4.8% vs expected |
| Pamela Casey + Dawn Weimar | 2–5 | 44% games | −6.5% vs expected |
| Teresa Holsen + Kathryn Tweet | 2–6 | 43% games | −7.7% vs expected |
| Dawn Weimar + Cindy Kowis | 0–6 | 35% games | −7.7% vs expected |
| Teresa Holsen + Cindy Kowis | 2–4 | 41% games | −8.3% vs expected |
Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.
Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.
Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.